I'm using dual-head with widescreen on one monitor with Ubuntu with no trouble. I had to change some settings in the config for X I believe, but that was about it.
My thoughts (including him beating me to it) exactly.
I recently left Comcast for Verizon FiOS. I even went to the local office and told them I had been a customer of theirs for over 20 years, as the local company was bought out several times, and they may want to take note on why a 20 year customer would leave. I gave them 10 reasons, but cited as top: 1) Bandwidth limits they refused to state, leaving me wondering if I was close or not and leading me to restrict a lot of my browsing, 2) Upload speeds slower than snail mail, and 3) P2P blocking due to their bandwidth fears. (Oh, and I mentioned their refusal to carry Boomerang on cable...)
What good would gigabit speeds be with a company that is so miserly with bandwidth in the first place? It might mean I'd get enough bandwidth to do what they should have let me do on my old account or it might even encourage them to let me do what Verizon already lets me do.
I wasn't clear. I should have talked about support on a free-as-in-beer in general. It was about what could be added, not what would be added for this particular system. Or at least that's how I read what I was responding to.
I'd think that there might be a learning curve as the staff adapts to Debian, but after that, yes, the support drops to almost nothing. That's why I use it on my servers -- hardly any time ever spent on support and if something goes wrong, there's a 99.9% chance it's hardware related.
Sure. Add in paying for tech support or the cost in man-hours it takes to keep it running. Both can make a serious dent where nobody expected to see one.
Actually, Debian is intended for servers and runs on more architectures than any other distro. The whole reason for the long testing cycle on Debian is to make sure it's as stable as possible so it can sit on a server and need little or no attention for days, weeks, or even months at a time.
I hated Debian at first because it wasn't friendly, but I looked into it more and realized it was the best choice I could make for my production servers. I can set them up and check once a week or so and they're still chugging along without need of intervention.
I wouldn't use Debian on my desktop (I use Kubuntu), but it can't be beat for servers.
It's NOT a desktop distro. Especially compared to Mandr* or Ubuntu or many others out there.
I am Vroomfondle and that is not a demand, it is a solid fact.
We are philosophers (though we may not be). We are here as representatives of Amalgamated Union of Philosophers, Sages, Luminaries, and Other Professional Thinking Persons and we want this machine off and we want off now.
What's the use of our sitting up all night saying there may (or may not be) a God if this machine comes along next morning and gives you his telephone number?
We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!
You'll have a National Philosopher's Strike on your hands!
There are many places with no choices at all. I'm 10 minutes from the state capital in Richmond, VA. I had no possible choice for anything other than dial-up until Comcast finally offered broadband in 2001, a few years after all my friends had it. Due to the James River and whatever weirdnesses exist in the Verizon planning office, I'm too far from the CO for regular DSL and might have been able to get ADSL, but even with other companies that offered it, that was doubtful. For me, it was either Comcast or nothing until Verizon rolled out FiOS in this area in December and I switched immediately.
Until then, considering that I transferred data to my customers over Internet and did download a lot of Linux distro CDs and downloaded a lot of old time radio shows (and *never* allowed any file sharing or what could be called illegal traffic on my line), I stayed paranoid and alert so I didn't fall victim to Comcast's limited/unlimited cutoff notices. I've talked with the local Comcast office a number of times. Most of the people there have been there when it was AT&T and even before that. They're good people and want to do well, but a lot of what they'd like to do is blocked by Comcast and their policies. I told them they might want to let their mothership know they were losing a 21+ year customer (way back to Continental Cable in this area) because of their Internet policies like the bandwidth games. The local people wanted to do what they could to keep me, but couldn't stop Comcast's vague bandwidth and p2p interference games.
Oh, and I told them one small reason, but a contributing factor was that I had been asking for Boomerang on cable for years, but it wasn't on. Their response? "Yes, that is one of our most requested channels." I said, "If it's so requested, why don't you have it?"
If someone expects to be an IT Manager after 7 yrs right out of undergrad/DeVry they are crazy.
That's the crux of a lot of what I'm saying. Again, it's in the context of this discussion. Even if it's 7 years out of any program, even a Master or Ph.D. program (especially a Ph.D.) and they have no work experience between a B.S. and going back for the higher degree. To me, that this person is asking that question after 7 years in the field would be a serious concern if he were working for me (or even if he were an outsider) and he were interviewing with me.
I don't want someone that agressive in my group, he quest for power (that's what it is) is scary.
That's part of why I wouldn't trust this person. He's in a hurry to get to IT management, but if he's that aggressive and ambitious, will he be happy in that position? Or will he settle in and, after 6 months in it, start to find it's not enough and want more? Given the text of the question, I would say there's a high probability he's going to want more. Then when he gets a higher position, he'll want more. While that attitude sounded good in any of the Michael J. Fox "super-yuppie" movies in the 1980s, it doesn't work well in reality.
I don't want to get into a lot of psychobabble, but I see two different possibilities: 1) He truly wants to be a manager in IT, or 2) He feels the need for something more, something to complete him, and thinks this next position will do it. If #1 is true, then he would have studied management and taken classes in it. He'd have been seeking any positions like team leader whenever possible and would be seeing to acquire a clear understanding of leadership. He would also realize that it's not likely he'll move into it that quickly, at least into a stable position. If it's #2, and this is part of the whole short-timer topic, then this is someone who needs to figure out, on his own, what he wants from life and a job. If he doesn't, he'll always want that one more promotion and never do well in any job he's given because he's looking for something a job can't give him.
I can't really compare my time with yours. I started my own company, although I tend to not like to talk about it that way because what goes on now is not about just me. As I said, there's also the other part of the story: people tend to work here for factors other than just the job. Some people are here because they know when the film production starts up, they'll be working a split job and doing some of the stuff they really want to do as well as the drudge work.
It may sound funny for a former teacher to say, but I can be leery of degrees. I want to be sure, when I'm talking to an MBA, that I'm talking to someone who values the experience more than what a professor, who may have been out of the business world for years, tells them. I would much prefer someone who got a degree, worked for a while, then got their MBA on their own time over someone that got a B.S., then went straight on to get an MBA and expects to move up quickly. Again this is a generality and not something I'd go by in every case.
I'm also acutely aware, as someone who spent, literally, years, sitting alone in my study at a computer for days straight, that there are quite different skills needed for a coder and for a manager and that many geeks are people persons and many are not -- and, unfortunately, many that aren't think they are just by virtue of intelligence and that once they're in charge, they can show everyone how to "do it right." So I'd agree about the personality issue.
I'd much rather go with a contractor than try to hire someone to get over a hump. I don't know your experience, but I've found that every time I've done anything, whether hiring or something else, that was just for a crunch like that, 9 times out of 10 I regretted it later. I've never really had to deal with contractors, so I tend to forget that's an option. It's just been coincidence it worked out that way.
In the context of this discussion, I've gone with the OP and the comments he made. Now I'm about to say two contradictory things here. The first is that I would not make a decision just on the fact that someone had gone through a number of jobs in a short time, at least not in real life. However, if someone had had 3-4 jobs in 7 years, that would raise a red flag. I often don't confront a red flag directly, but will ask about it in indirect ways -- and come at it from 2 different directions, but not one right after the other. For instance, I'd ask the usual about why he left those jobs, but later I'd something close up in a different way and watch for contradictions. At the same time, it's a great chance to see if he badmouths his former employer. Now here's the contradiction: In this context, considering what the OP said, he claims he's been "climbing the ladder" over the past 7 years. Since this is all the data we have, I'm making certain assumptions in the context of this discussion. For instance, I find a 7 year climb a bit too much like what we've seen in a lot of graduates who think they'll be getting promotions and getting into management in the next few years. In this context, I wonder just how much this person is learning in each job and, especially since he mentions management, just how much he's learning about dealing with long term consequences of actions in the workplace. Is he leaving these places when he's built up too much ill will?
I'm also lucky in that we have a small shop with a lot of special situations, so there's a lot of crap I've never had to deal with here. One focus is on a family or friendly atmosphere. The data work is only one part of a company as we're working on developing a film studio, so generally the people that want to work here are in it for more than just a paycheck.
When I'm talking about training, I consider an "official" training period, but my feeling is that someone is still in training for a while after that. Even back when I was dealing with simpler jobs like video editing, I never felt like a person fully knew our style for 3-4 months on the job. Part of it is my teaching background and knowing that even when someone is declared as trained, there are still things that will crop up involving exceptions for a while.
As for the comments about patterns and therapy, I think you're taking them far too seriously, but on the other hand, I have seen that pattern many times. I learned how to recognize and deal with such things back when I was teaching in a residential treatment program. The only reason someone would have to complain about them or find them discriminatory is if, for some reason, they identified with them. I'm not saying that applies to you, but I've seen that kind of thing over and over. True, there are some types of jobs that are short term, but those are the exception.
Yes, they do, and there is always someone at the far end of the bell curve, but if someone has had a number of jobs over 7 years, that's enough to raise some serious red flags. Were they always let go because of last-hired-first-fired policies? It could be a run of bad luck, but that's a slim shot.
True, they might leave a job for any of those reasons, but if they've left a number of jobs, then it comes back to my statement made even earlier: if someone keeps changing jobs frequently, then why should you expect them to work for you very long?
6-9 months is not far out of the ballpark, depending on the type of company. While there are some jobs that one can learn in a shorter time, if it takes a high level of skill, even when a person is "trained" officially, there are still a lot of ares where they may need guidance. No company has infinite resources. If you hire someone, it's going to take time and money to train them. If you're hiring a gas pump attendant you can train in a day and he lasts 6 months, that's not a problem, but if you have to train someone in a technical position and it takes months to train them well, then are you, as a manager with a limited budget, going to want to spend those limited resources on someone that you have every reason to expect won't stay in the job long?
The longer it takes to train someone, the more you've invested in them. I figure an IT manager, for my small company, would take at least 3-4 months before they're completely on their own. If it takes me that long to train someone, I am going to want someone that's likely to stay as long as possible. I don't have the time to do that kind of training every 2 years for one position.
You are talking about what may be a one or two time occurrence. We're talking about patterns. If someone has a pattern of taking jobs working in bad situations, then I don't want them working for me until they've had a therapist who can get them straight on why they seek to fail. If they claim that's what all their past jobs are, then they're likely to find something to piss and moan about in any job and they're just looking for an excuse to explain their unhappiness. The same for them as for the others: let them deal with their problems in therapy and NOT in my workplace.
As for your last statement, there is no place anyone talks about assuming anything -- you just made the assumption there. Nobody got that detailed about the hiring process or how such evaluations were made.
Actually, this was one of my first thoughts, too. Jumping around doesn't get one noticed.
It sounds like you've moved around a lot in the past few years. If you (the OP) were applying to my company, I'd wonder if you were in a hurry to get somewhere. True, you might tell me you're in a rush to get to the position I'm hiring for, but how would I know that's true?
From what I read and the way it sounded, my first thought was that this is a person who is in a hurry to get somewhere. He's not patient and seems to think he can move up the ladder quickly. In my experience such people are always trying to get up another rung and always thinking they'll be happy at the next level, yet never doing but so well at the current job because of such an anxiety over getting the next job.
A history of jumping around, to me, indicates a person has trouble following through and lets me know that if I hire him, I'll be replacing him fairly soon. He may say he wants an IT management job, but if that seven years started right after college, then this is not someone who knows what it's like to stay in a job long enough to be frustrated -- or how to manage someone in such a situation.
And if we do see that kind of speed for personal use, anyone actually using it to download a fair number of DVDs will find themselves dropped from Comcast.
It would be amazing! Too bad most of us wouldn't get a good view of it.
Of course the big thing to worry about is not one hitting Mars, but one from Mars hitting Earth - especially if it lands somewhere near Grover's Mill, New Jersey. (And even worse if the name Yoyodyne is associated with it!)
Interesting comparison to cars. That also brings into point my first consideration. I remember back in the 70's or 80's when a lot of the American car companies were having trouble because of the new Japanese models. American companies kept putting out more and more of what they wanted the public to buy and the Japanese companies were finding out what sold and focusing on that. It was only when American companies began to realize what was going on that they started listening to customers instead of telling them what was good or desirable.
In this case, Dell has proven they care what the customer says, but if it comes down to the OS, I'll go with Apple. They have been known to listen to the customer at least once in a while. Microsoft? Vista was all about telling customers what they wanted instead of listening to them and the rest of the world (which explains the YouTube videos of Gates showing off features and being asked if they weren't the same as what Mac had already and Gates not realizing it).
Personally, I hope MS ends up having as many problems as the American car makers did back in the 70's and 80's. Then they'll either end up as a has been or learn to listen to customers instead of telling customers what they should want.
Why book in advance? I never have before and it's always worked. I just made reservations and deposited a penny in a savings account when I got back and there's never been a problem.
If there will be a rush in OUR future, it's in Milliways' past, so they'd have already been overbooked when I got there on any previous visits.
On the other hand, advance reservations may be necessary if you're the Great Prophet Zarquon.
Wow. You love having a soapbox, don't you? I just love it when someone who won't even log in with a username feels they can tell everyone else what is right and wrong.
Even more, I find it interesting that, even without giving out any details, so many people just assume they know what kind of person I am, how I run my business, and what kind of decisions I make.
Actually, I belong to a religion that, in essence, demands I act by my ethics at all times, in and out of work, in dating, in everything. Yet you would not know that.
You make broad sweeping statements based on very little evidence.
That I take the burden of making the decision for my company, in itself, is neither ethical nor unethical, unless I totally mis-remember my philosophy courses from college.
Yet you are sure, from just a small bit of information, that I'm unethical and run an unethical company. Read my other posts in this thread. Then wait until you know something about my business before you start calling names.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Debian is intended for servers and runs on more architectures than any other L inux distro.
Fixed it.
I'm using dual-head with widescreen on one monitor with Ubuntu with no trouble. I had to change some settings in the config for X I believe, but that was about it.
My thoughts (including him beating me to it) exactly.
I recently left Comcast for Verizon FiOS. I even went to the local office and told them I had been a customer of theirs for over 20 years, as the local company was bought out several times, and they may want to take note on why a 20 year customer would leave. I gave them 10 reasons, but cited as top: 1) Bandwidth limits they refused to state, leaving me wondering if I was close or not and leading me to restrict a lot of my browsing, 2) Upload speeds slower than snail mail, and 3) P2P blocking due to their bandwidth fears. (Oh, and I mentioned their refusal to carry Boomerang on cable...)
What good would gigabit speeds be with a company that is so miserly with bandwidth in the first place? It might mean I'd get enough bandwidth to do what they should have let me do on my old account or it might even encourage them to let me do what Verizon already lets me do.
I wasn't clear. I should have talked about support on a free-as-in-beer in general. It was about what could be added, not what would be added for this particular system. Or at least that's how I read what I was responding to.
I'd think that there might be a learning curve as the staff adapts to Debian, but after that, yes, the support drops to almost nothing. That's why I use it on my servers -- hardly any time ever spent on support and if something goes wrong, there's a 99.9% chance it's hardware related.
Sure. Add in paying for tech support or the cost in man-hours it takes to keep it running. Both can make a serious dent where nobody expected to see one.
Actually, Debian is intended for servers and runs on more architectures than any other distro. The whole reason for the long testing cycle on Debian is to make sure it's as stable as possible so it can sit on a server and need little or no attention for days, weeks, or even months at a time.
I hated Debian at first because it wasn't friendly, but I looked into it more and realized it was the best choice I could make for my production servers. I can set them up and check once a week or so and they're still chugging along without need of intervention.
I wouldn't use Debian on my desktop (I use Kubuntu), but it can't be beat for servers.
It's NOT a desktop distro. Especially compared to Mandr* or Ubuntu or many others out there.
And remember, as the instructions on the reactor on Turkana IV remind us, you can never have too much water in a nuclear reactor.
I am Vroomfondle and that is not a demand, it is a solid fact.
We are philosophers (though we may not be). We are here as representatives of Amalgamated Union of Philosophers, Sages, Luminaries, and Other Professional Thinking Persons and we want this machine off and we want off now.
What's the use of our sitting up all night saying there may (or may not be) a God if this machine comes along next morning and gives you his telephone number?
We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!
You'll have a National Philosopher's Strike on your hands!
The geek doth protest too much, methinks.
(Some people take themselves WAY too seriously!)
Over 100 movies in a year? And you call your viewing time limited? I get to see 2-3 a month, at most right now.
It may not have been a great "teen flick" but it was certainly a good geek movie.
Over 100 movies in a year and you haven't heard enough about this to check it out?
Kid, I've served with geeks: I've known many geeks; geeks are most friends of mine. Kid, you're no geek.
Consider your geek card revoked (if, indeed, you ever had one).
There are many places with no choices at all. I'm 10 minutes from the state capital in Richmond, VA. I had no possible choice for anything other than dial-up until Comcast finally offered broadband in 2001, a few years after all my friends had it. Due to the James River and whatever weirdnesses exist in the Verizon planning office, I'm too far from the CO for regular DSL and might have been able to get ADSL, but even with other companies that offered it, that was doubtful. For me, it was either Comcast or nothing until Verizon rolled out FiOS in this area in December and I switched immediately.
Until then, considering that I transferred data to my customers over Internet and did download a lot of Linux distro CDs and downloaded a lot of old time radio shows (and *never* allowed any file sharing or what could be called illegal traffic on my line), I stayed paranoid and alert so I didn't fall victim to Comcast's limited/unlimited cutoff notices. I've talked with the local Comcast office a number of times. Most of the people there have been there when it was AT&T and even before that. They're good people and want to do well, but a lot of what they'd like to do is blocked by Comcast and their policies. I told them they might want to let their mothership know they were losing a 21+ year customer (way back to Continental Cable in this area) because of their Internet policies like the bandwidth games. The local people wanted to do what they could to keep me, but couldn't stop Comcast's vague bandwidth and p2p interference games.
Oh, and I told them one small reason, but a contributing factor was that I had been asking for Boomerang on cable for years, but it wasn't on. Their response? "Yes, that is one of our most requested channels." I said, "If it's so requested, why don't you have it?"
Greetings Professor Falken. Would you like to play a game?
Okay, so it's a fictional example, but it's an example.
If someone expects to be an IT Manager after 7 yrs right out of undergrad/DeVry they are crazy.
That's the crux of a lot of what I'm saying. Again, it's in the context of this discussion. Even if it's 7 years out of any program, even a Master or Ph.D. program (especially a Ph.D.) and they have no work experience between a B.S. and going back for the higher degree. To me, that this person is asking that question after 7 years in the field would be a serious concern if he were working for me (or even if he were an outsider) and he were interviewing with me.
I don't want someone that agressive in my group, he quest for power (that's what it is) is scary.
That's part of why I wouldn't trust this person. He's in a hurry to get to IT management, but if he's that aggressive and ambitious, will he be happy in that position? Or will he settle in and, after 6 months in it, start to find it's not enough and want more? Given the text of the question, I would say there's a high probability he's going to want more. Then when he gets a higher position, he'll want more. While that attitude sounded good in any of the Michael J. Fox "super-yuppie" movies in the 1980s, it doesn't work well in reality.
I don't want to get into a lot of psychobabble, but I see two different possibilities: 1) He truly wants to be a manager in IT, or 2) He feels the need for something more, something to complete him, and thinks this next position will do it. If #1 is true, then he would have studied management and taken classes in it. He'd have been seeking any positions like team leader whenever possible and would be seeing to acquire a clear understanding of leadership. He would also realize that it's not likely he'll move into it that quickly, at least into a stable position. If it's #2, and this is part of the whole short-timer topic, then this is someone who needs to figure out, on his own, what he wants from life and a job. If he doesn't, he'll always want that one more promotion and never do well in any job he's given because he's looking for something a job can't give him.
I can't really compare my time with yours. I started my own company, although I tend to not like to talk about it that way because what goes on now is not about just me. As I said, there's also the other part of the story: people tend to work here for factors other than just the job. Some people are here because they know when the film production starts up, they'll be working a split job and doing some of the stuff they really want to do as well as the drudge work.
It may sound funny for a former teacher to say, but I can be leery of degrees. I want to be sure, when I'm talking to an MBA, that I'm talking to someone who values the experience more than what a professor, who may have been out of the business world for years, tells them. I would much prefer someone who got a degree, worked for a while, then got their MBA on their own time over someone that got a B.S., then went straight on to get an MBA and expects to move up quickly. Again this is a generality and not something I'd go by in every case.
I'm also acutely aware, as someone who spent, literally, years, sitting alone in my study at a computer for days straight, that there are quite different skills needed for a coder and for a manager and that many geeks are people persons and many are not -- and, unfortunately, many that aren't think they are just by virtue of intelligence and that once they're in charge, they can show everyone how to "do it right." So I'd agree about the personality issue.
I'd much rather go with a contractor than try to hire someone to get over a hump. I don't know your experience, but I've found that every time I've done anything, whether hiring or something else, that was just for a crunch like that, 9 times out of 10 I regretted it later. I've never really had to deal with contractors, so I tend to forget that's an option. It's just been coincidence it worked out that way.
In the context of this discussion, I've gone with the OP and the comments he made. Now I'm about to say two contradictory things here. The first is that I would not make a decision just on the fact that someone had gone through a number of jobs in a short time, at least not in real life. However, if someone had had 3-4 jobs in 7 years, that would raise a red flag. I often don't confront a red flag directly, but will ask about it in indirect ways -- and come at it from 2 different directions, but not one right after the other. For instance, I'd ask the usual about why he left those jobs, but later I'd something close up in a different way and watch for contradictions. At the same time, it's a great chance to see if he badmouths his former employer. Now here's the contradiction: In this context, considering what the OP said, he claims he's been "climbing the ladder" over the past 7 years. Since this is all the data we have, I'm making certain assumptions in the context of this discussion. For instance, I find a 7 year climb a bit too much like what we've seen in a lot of graduates who think they'll be getting promotions and getting into management in the next few years. In this context, I wonder just how much this person is learning in each job and, especially since he mentions management, just how much he's learning about dealing with long term consequences of actions in the workplace. Is he leaving these places when he's built up too much ill will?
I'm also lucky in that we have a small shop with a lot of special situations, so there's a lot of crap I've never had to deal with here. One focus is on a family or friendly atmosphere. The data work is only one part of a company as we're working on developing a film studio, so generally the people that want to work here are in it for more than just a paycheck.
When I'm talking about training, I consider an "official" training period, but my feeling is that someone is still in training for a while after that. Even back when I was dealing with simpler jobs like video editing, I never felt like a person fully knew our style for 3-4 months on the job. Part of it is my teaching background and knowing that even when someone is declared as trained, there are still things that will crop up involving exceptions for a while.
As for the comments about patterns and therapy, I think you're taking them far too seriously, but on the other hand, I have seen that pattern many times. I learned how to recognize and deal with such things back when I was teaching in a residential treatment program. The only reason someone would have to complain about them or find them discriminatory is if, for some reason, they identified with them. I'm not saying that applies to you, but I've seen that kind of thing over and over. True, there are some types of jobs that are short term, but those are the exception.
Yes, they do, and there is always someone at the far end of the bell curve, but if someone has had a number of jobs over 7 years, that's enough to raise some serious red flags. Were they always let go because of last-hired-first-fired policies? It could be a run of bad luck, but that's a slim shot.
True, they might leave a job for any of those reasons, but if they've left a number of jobs, then it comes back to my statement made even earlier: if someone keeps changing jobs frequently, then why should you expect them to work for you very long?
6-9 months is not far out of the ballpark, depending on the type of company. While there are some jobs that one can learn in a shorter time, if it takes a high level of skill, even when a person is "trained" officially, there are still a lot of ares where they may need guidance. No company has infinite resources. If you hire someone, it's going to take time and money to train them. If you're hiring a gas pump attendant you can train in a day and he lasts 6 months, that's not a problem, but if you have to train someone in a technical position and it takes months to train them well, then are you, as a manager with a limited budget, going to want to spend those limited resources on someone that you have every reason to expect won't stay in the job long?
The longer it takes to train someone, the more you've invested in them. I figure an IT manager, for my small company, would take at least 3-4 months before they're completely on their own. If it takes me that long to train someone, I am going to want someone that's likely to stay as long as possible. I don't have the time to do that kind of training every 2 years for one position.
You are talking about what may be a one or two time occurrence. We're talking about patterns. If someone has a pattern of taking jobs working in bad situations, then I don't want them working for me until they've had a therapist who can get them straight on why they seek to fail. If they claim that's what all their past jobs are, then they're likely to find something to piss and moan about in any job and they're just looking for an excuse to explain their unhappiness. The same for them as for the others: let them deal with their problems in therapy and NOT in my workplace.
As for your last statement, there is no place anyone talks about assuming anything -- you just made the assumption there. Nobody got that detailed about the hiring process or how such evaluations were made.
Actually, this was one of my first thoughts, too. Jumping around doesn't get one noticed.
It sounds like you've moved around a lot in the past few years. If you (the OP) were applying to my company, I'd wonder if you were in a hurry to get somewhere. True, you might tell me you're in a rush to get to the position I'm hiring for, but how would I know that's true?
From what I read and the way it sounded, my first thought was that this is a person who is in a hurry to get somewhere. He's not patient and seems to think he can move up the ladder quickly. In my experience such people are always trying to get up another rung and always thinking they'll be happy at the next level, yet never doing but so well at the current job because of such an anxiety over getting the next job.
A history of jumping around, to me, indicates a person has trouble following through and lets me know that if I hire him, I'll be replacing him fairly soon. He may say he wants an IT management job, but if that seven years started right after college, then this is not someone who knows what it's like to stay in a job long enough to be frustrated -- or how to manage someone in such a situation.
There was no D pod, just Anna, Betty, and Clara.
You sure you didn't step out the airlock?
And if we do see that kind of speed for personal use, anyone actually using it to download a fair number of DVDs will find themselves dropped from Comcast.
It would be amazing! Too bad most of us wouldn't get a good view of it.
Of course the big thing to worry about is not one hitting Mars, but one from Mars hitting Earth - especially if it lands somewhere near Grover's Mill, New Jersey. (And even worse if the name Yoyodyne is associated with it!)
Interesting comparison to cars. That also brings into point my first consideration. I remember back in the 70's or 80's when a lot of the American car companies were having trouble because of the new Japanese models. American companies kept putting out more and more of what they wanted the public to buy and the Japanese companies were finding out what sold and focusing on that. It was only when American companies began to realize what was going on that they started listening to customers instead of telling them what was good or desirable.
In this case, Dell has proven they care what the customer says, but if it comes down to the OS, I'll go with Apple. They have been known to listen to the customer at least once in a while. Microsoft? Vista was all about telling customers what they wanted instead of listening to them and the rest of the world (which explains the YouTube videos of Gates showing off features and being asked if they weren't the same as what Mac had already and Gates not realizing it).
Personally, I hope MS ends up having as many problems as the American car makers did back in the 70's and 80's. Then they'll either end up as a has been or learn to listen to customers instead of telling customers what they should want.
When I tested adamantium, it gave off a shower of brilliant white sparks as well.
But they were so hot they caught my workshop on fire.
Why book in advance? I never have before and it's always worked. I just made reservations and deposited a penny in a savings account when I got back and there's never been a problem.
If there will be a rush in OUR future, it's in Milliways' past, so they'd have already been overbooked when I got there on any previous visits.
On the other hand, advance reservations may be necessary if you're the Great Prophet Zarquon.
Why bother booking? Just wait. We all know time will stop in 5 years or so in 2012. Who needs Milliways when the end of all time is so close?
In the WD FAQ it lists OOG, not OGG.
Interesting.
Wow. You love having a soapbox, don't you? I just love it when someone who won't even log in with a username feels they can tell everyone else what is right and wrong.
Even more, I find it interesting that, even without giving out any details, so many people just assume they know what kind of person I am, how I run my business, and what kind of decisions I make.
Actually, I belong to a religion that, in essence, demands I act by my ethics at all times, in and out of work, in dating, in everything. Yet you would not know that.
You make broad sweeping statements based on very little evidence.
That I take the burden of making the decision for my company, in itself, is neither ethical nor unethical, unless I totally mis-remember my philosophy courses from college.
Yet you are sure, from just a small bit of information, that I'm unethical and run an unethical company. Read my other posts in this thread. Then wait until you know something about my business before you start calling names.